DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Information Disclosure Statement
Applicant’s information disclosure statement filed 12/24/2024 has been considered and is included in the file.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1 and 4 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) and 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Fujii et al. (US 2023/0311800, noted in IDS filed 12/4/2024).
Regarding claim 1, Fujii et al. discloses a vehicle front structure (Fig. 1) including a front bumper cover (2) having an opening (11) and a sensor (8) disposed in a region corresponding to the opening (Figs. 1-2), comprising: a cover member disposed on a vehicle front side with respect to the sensor (paragraph [0024] mentions a housing for the sensor) and provided so as to cover the sensor (paragraph [0024] mentions a housing for the sensor); and an air guide member (4) disposed on a vehicle rear side with respect to the sensor (Fig. 2).
Regarding claim 4, Fujii et al. discloses the vehicle front structure of claim 1 and further discloses a front grille (5) provided in the opening (11), wherein the sensor is attached to the front grille (Figs. 1 and 3, attached via support board (8b)).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claim 2 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Fujii et al. (US 2023/0311800, noted in IDS filed 12/4/2024) in view of Bigot et al. (CN 108473103, machine translation attached).
Regarding claim 2, Fujii et al. discloses the vehicle front structure of claim 1, and discloses wherein the air guide member is provided so as to extend from the cover member toward the vehicle rear side (Fig. 2). However, Fujii et al. does not explicitly disclose wherein the air guide member is inclined so as to be positioned downward toward the vehicle rear side when viewed from the side.
Bigot et al., like Fujii et al., teaches a vehicle front structure and further teaches wherein the air guide member (3) is inclined so as to be positioned downward toward the vehicle rear side when viewed from the side (Fig. 3).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the vehicle front structure of Fujii et al. to include a downward incline for the air guide member as taught by Bigot et al., with a reasonable expectation of success, in order to provide an extended direction for the air flow once disturbed by the sensor in order to reduce turbulence in the air flow.
Claim 3 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Fujii et al. (US 2023/0311800, noted in IDS filed 12/4/2024) in view of Mori et al. (US 2023/0311799).
Regarding claim 3, Fujii et al. discloses the vehicle front structure of claim 1. However, Fujii et al. does not explicitly disclose wherein the air guide member is provided to have a width that becomes smaller toward the vehicle rear side when viewed in plan.
Mori et al., like Fujii et al., teaches a vehicle front structure, and further teaches wherein the air guide member is provided to have a width that becomes smaller toward the vehicle rear side when viewed in plan (Fig. 3 shows the decrease in width as the air guide member (4) extends toward the vehicle rear side).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the vehicle front structure of Fujii et al. to provide a smaller width as the air guide member extends rearward as taught by Mori et al., with a reasonable expectation of success, in order to provide the air directly towards the spacing made from grill shutters in order to further redirect the air flow towards the radiator (Mori et al.: paragraph [0041]).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant’s disclosure.
Takahashi et al. (US 2020/0011989) teaches a vehicle front structure with sensor, camera, and radar in housing attached to a grille. Kobayashi (US 2019/0377061) teaches a radar device that explicitly notes a millimeter-wave radar mounted on a vehicle.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CARLY W. LYNCH whose telephone number is (571)272-5552. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Thursday 8:30am-5:30pm, Eastern Time, alternate Friday.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Peter M Poon can be reached at 571-272-6891. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of published or unpublished applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Unpublished application information in Patent Center is available to registered users. To file and manage patent submissions in Patent Center, visit: https://patentcenter.uspto.gov. Visit https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center for more information about Patent Center and https://www.uspto.gov/patents/docx for information about filing in DOCX format. For additional questions, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/CARLY W. LYNCH/Examiner, Art Unit 3643
Prosecution Insights